Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Photo Gallery
Wild and Crazy Post Processing
Page <prev 2 of 2
Feb 4, 2023 13:57:16   #
Ava'sPapa Loc: Cheshire, Ct.
 
m43rebel wrote:
I had been struggling with one of my photos. I liked the composition but the day I took it was dull and overcast. Colors were muted and dingy. I took several approaches which were calculated to retain some sense of realism. But nothing worked. It continued to look uninspired and uninspiring.

Then I noticed some camera reviews by Ken Rockwell, who many of you have read. Many of his sample landscape images were surprising in their oversaturated, almost neon color effects. He is honest in his preference for strong vibrant colors. I thought to myself ... self ... nothing I have tried has worked so far. Why not give up on a realistic visage and try Ken's oversaturated and overstated approach to color application.

Here was my approach, using Luminar Neo:
1 ... I lightened exposure extensively,
2 ... triple saturated the existing colors,
3 ... added significant contrast,
4 ... added significant sharpening,
5 ... then added a strong "golden hour" coloration.
6 ... After that, I upscaled the image 2x with VanceAI Upscaler.

First, I appreciated how much I could lighten the exposure from my Olympus em10 file. Additionally, the dullness of the image started to come to life. I certainly left the world of realism. But as I continued to look at the results, I began to see the exaggerated colors in the same color pallet used by oil painters, strong, bold, and bright. The more I examined it, the more interesting the image became.

Most of you probably have tried this, and I am just a newby in the theater of wilder colorations. I have been dabbling in photography for decades, but I have never really found my own style. This was just another experiment for me, though probably old hat you many of you.

Attached are before and after pictures.

I appreciate any feedback you could give me ... even derisions. LOL
I had been struggling with one of my photos. I li... (show quote)


A tad brighter than your original maybe? I wanted to keep the sky in the photo and the colors more natural than unreal.

MINE
MINE...

YOURS
YOURS...

Reply
Feb 4, 2023 14:00:40   #
Ourspolair
 
m43rebel wrote:
Based on some of your feedback. I thought I would simply back off the saturation a bit and see what happens. Here is the result. Your thoughts?


This now looks great in my honest opinion!

Reply
Feb 4, 2023 14:06:50   #
ygelman Loc: new -- North of Poughkeepsie!
 
m43rebel wrote:
I had been struggling with one of my photos. I liked the composition but the day I took it was dull and overcast. . . . .
I appreciate any feedback you could give me ... even derisions. LOL

Looking at all the comments, I notice that none of them, even mine, mentioned the change in composition between your first and second images.

I feel you lost more than the mountain tops when you clipped them; bring them back.

Reply
 
 
Feb 4, 2023 14:15:01   #
jeffrey8066
 
Looks nice in B & W

Reply
Feb 4, 2023 14:41:16   #
m43rebel
 
Thanks. I did want to maintain the evening sunset effect with the early Spring setting.

Reply
Feb 4, 2023 14:47:11   #
m43rebel
 
As an aside, you may be interested in the fact that it is approximately 4 miles (6 km) from the foreground to the background in the picture.

Reply
Feb 4, 2023 18:28:15   #
yssirk123 Loc: New Jersey
 
The revised version is very nice - well done!

Reply
 
 
Feb 4, 2023 19:23:05   #
Moondoggie Loc: Southern California
 
IMHO, I like the first one the best. The second one is over saturated for my taste. Thanks for sharing you work.

Reply
Feb 4, 2023 21:16:26   #
fredtoo Loc: Houston
 
All of this is pretty much just as personal as cropping. What one person really likes, another thinks its just wrong.

My favorite photos are the ones that are super sharp, have really great colors, and you just cant really tell whether any post processing was done.

If I was a professional, and relied on selling photos to pay my bills, I might process the Dickens out of them if that's what it takes. But I just do it to please myself and a few other folks, so I try and keep them guessing...is it processed, or is it right out of the camera?

But that perhaps has to do with my history: first camera was a Pentax 35mm manual focus, and required a hand-held light meter, and film and processing that costs too much to waste on multiple shots. You didn't have much choice except to get it right the first time, or trash it. And the favorite saying of the time was "The camera doesn't lie". Anyone remember that one?

Reply
Feb 5, 2023 14:29:22   #
jimvanells Loc: Augusta, GA
 
Much better than the over saturated one but IMHO, back off just a bit on the saturation.

Reply
Feb 7, 2023 14:38:08   #
topcat Loc: Alameda, CA
 
I really prefer the original. It looks more natural.
Your addition is a lot better. You don't have to dial up your corrections, sometimes what you see is the best.

Reply
 
 
Feb 11, 2023 11:45:50   #
m43rebel
 
Thanks for all your comments and suggestions. With that, I did some additional processing and here is what I came up with.


(Download)

Reply
Feb 11, 2023 11:59:58   #
AzPicLady Loc: Behind the camera!
 
m43rebel wrote:
Thanks for all your comments and suggestions. With that, I did some additional processing and here is what I came up with.


I think what you've done is lovely.

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 2
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Photo Gallery
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.